----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 9:49 AM
Subject: Re: [MD] moq thought experiement 1.
Hi Squonk,?
?
Well, there's that word: exist. Unassuming little bugger, isn't it? At the
moment I'm of the mind that no-thing inherently exists. Relationally and
ever-changingly exist? Yes. But definitely not as a thing onto itself.
What does that mean? To me it means that I exist as a flow of value events
and whatever I encounter exists of a flow of value events. Water into
water.
?
What do you mean by 'exist'?
Hi Marsha,
The water metaphor reminds me of my 'event stream' from The edge of Chaos.
By exist i mean 'a stable event.'
The stream metaphor would have mean that events occur in the stream of DQ,
and stable swirls are sq.
Does this answer your question?
If we agree then you must understand that i have it on the authority of
Anthony McWatt that?we are no longer using terminology used by the
Metaphysics of Quality.
I always have on the top of my mind Quality(Dynamic Quality/static quality).
That I find approaching and comparing it to a Buddhist point-of-view
(however limited that may be) should not be held against me. And I, too,
need first-hand experience. I would make such a difficult student.
This is fine by me, because i don't feel i have to Parrot?what ever
Pirsig?states in his metaphysics. It's not that i think the moq is rubbish,
it's just that i can't help thinking for myself, and can't be discouraged
from doing so.
I agree with you about independent thinking, but I think the MOQ is a
beautiful metaphysics. It's elegant in its simplicity. Any confusion is
mind's arrogant ability to over-complicate.
It seems that as evolution progresses the swirls become less inherently
existant.
Have you ever noticed that Marsha?
Think about it.
Something inherently exists, or it doesn't. No more or less is possible.
?
?
Marsha:?
Aren't static patterns still process within the field of DQ??
?
s: This sounds good to me.?
I argued for this in Liverpool 2005, but it got?edited out of the dvd >
apparently, so i can't ask you to consider it. I don't know if this is >
true because i've not seen it, maybe you could confirm it for me please >
Marsha??
?
That was then, this is now.
s: Was this presentation edited out of the dvd Marsha?
Please tell me if you would be so kind.
Come on... Maybe you were not edited INTO the dvd. That would be an
artistic decision to be made by the creator. Tough luck kiddo!
?
If static patterns are processes within the field of DQ, then it would >
appear some processes are more dynamic than others,?and not simply those
> separated by?the 4 levels of evolutionary development.?I don't have a >
problem with this. I think it could lead to some cool things.?
?
There is another interesting word: appears. There is that little Buddhist
story about a rope that is mistaken for a snake.?
?
What do you mean by 'appears'??
s:?By appears i mean: argued for by Robert M Pirsig in his book Lila.
References please, and I would expect more than just the usage of the word
in a sentence. Besides I asked for your understanding.
?
?
TE1 suggests that the blank slate human brain is an exceptionally dynamic
> process. I understand TE1?may have?disturbed you Marsha, but it's been
> most helpful for me in ways i did not anticipate, so it was well worth
it > as far as i'm concerned, because of the points you. and others,
have?made.?
?
Your TE1 didn't disturb me in the least. If it had/has value for you, work
it out. I must confess that I've been in some pretty strange experiences
trying pursue whatever it is that is calling to me. Kind of like Devil's
Tower in the film "Close Encounters of the Third Kind". Or maybe I'm being
too dramatic.?
?
My questions are just trying to see better from your point-of-view.?
?
s: Great!
squonk
Marsha
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
